Sreena Narayanan And Others v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/16TH POUSHA, 1936 WA.No.1258 of 2012 IN WP(C).8832/2011 ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 8832/2011 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 08-08-2011 APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:

----------------------- 1.

MINOR SREENA NARAYANAN, AGED 17 YEARS, D/O.C.NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT VEENA NIVAS, KARUVAKKAD, PAKKAM POST, PALLIKKARA VIA, KASARAGOD.

REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER C.NARAYANAN, AGED 45 YEARS. 2.

MINOR SHAHITHA D.S., AGED 17 YEARS, D/O.SHANKARA, R/AT DEELAMPADY HOUSE, MULLERIA POST, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER SHANKARA, AGED 47 YEARS. 3.

MINOR HARIPRASAD, AGED 17 YEARS, D/O. K.V.MURALEEDHARAN, R/AT HARIPRASAD, 4TH GATE, UDUMA, BARE P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER K.V.MURALEEDHARAN, AGED 46 YEARS.

BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

----------------------- 1.

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT ANNEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 1.

2.

COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, SHANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 1.

R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOUSHAD THOTTATHIL. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ANTONY DOMINIC & ALEXANDER THOMAS, JJ.

=============================== Writ Appeal No. 1258 of 2012 ==================== Dated this the 6th day of January, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Antony Dominic, J.

The appellants filed WP(C) No.8832/11, which was dismissed by the learned single Judge by judgment dated 8/8/2011. It is this judgment, which is challenged before us.

2.

The issue raised by the appellants was whether the caste 'Chetty' to which they belong, which is an Other Backward Community in the State of Kerala, is liable to be included in the list of SEBC - Socially and Economically Backward Communities. We notice that similar contention urged was rejected by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment dated 12th of August, 2014 in WA No.839/14. This, therefore, means that the issue canvassed by the appellants is fully covered against them by virtue of the judgment in WA No.839/14. For that reason, this writ appeal is also liable to be dismissed and we do so.

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE Rp